Help us understand.

[LightSome]

Disclaimer this thread isn't really mine. Just providing the evidence a player asked me to do.
Though my personal thought on the matter is that the player does not hack. I've fought against the player many a times and frankly it was a pitiful experience.


- accepted

Please help us understand why @87Cake was banned. if there is any other evidence I strongly ask you to post it either here or on a official thread.
Thank you

@JustMe03 @OpticLuLz

 

[JustMe03]

Can't watch the first vid

 

[finnoybu]

Soooo... video proof is no longer valid proof? Fantastic. :/

 

[LightSome]

Soooo... video proof is no longer valid proof? Fantastic. :/

What do you mean ?

 

[JustMe03]

Sav use this one

 

[OpticLuLz]

Video proof is valid proof in most cases. They should make it a rule that if the reporter isn't credible enough and the reported player is AFK in spawn using killaura, video proof should not be valid. (Staff and frequent reporters should be exempt from this rule.)
There are a few differences between the Jigsaw demonstration video and the report on 87Cake.
1- No chat messages were sent in the fashion of "[Name] is now the fake hacker"
2- I understand Fake hacker is impossible to detect on the reporter's screen if they choose to hide it.
3- No custom fonts in the reporter's video.
Alright there's also a few differences between the guy YOU reported and 87Cake.
1- 87Cake's aim and clicks per second were smoother and faster. (Fake hack can easily accomplish this)
2- The guy you reported could have been very well trolling you in spawn. He attacks after you supposedly "Step out of range"

Could this have been FakeHacker? Yes. But it's actually impossible to find the truth now. Screensharing isn't an option, there was no trace of FakeHacker on the reporter's screen. I think we COULD look through the reporter's logs but if he doesn't provide them, can you really consider that grounds for a ban on the reporter?

 

[JustMe03]

Video proof is valid proof in most cases. They should make it a rule that if the reporter isn't credible enough and the reported player is AFK in spawn using killaura, video proof should not be valid. (Staff and frequent reporters should be exempt from this rule.)
There are a few differences between the Jigsaw demonstration video and the report on 87Cake.
1- No chat messages were sent in the fashion of "[Name] is now the fake hacker"
2- I understand Fake hacker is impossible to detect on the reporter's screen if they choose to hide it.
3- No custom fonts in the reporter's video.
Alright there's also a few differences between the guy YOU reported and 87Cake.
1- 87Cake's aim and clicks per second were smoother and faster. (Fake hack can easily accomplish this)
2- The guy you reported could have been very well trolling you in spawn. He attacks after you supposedly "Step out of range"

Could this have been FakeHacker? Yes. But it's actually impossible to find the truth now. Screensharing isn't an option, there was no trace of FakeHacker on the reporter's screen. I think we COULD look through the reporter's logs but if he doesn't provide them, can you really consider that grounds for a ban on the reporter?

Jigsaw can be used in ghost mode, it should hide the fake hacker messages

 

[OpticLuLz]

Jigsaw can be used in ghost mode, it should hide the fake hacker messages

"2- I understand Fake hacker is impossible to detect on the reporter's screen if they choose to hide it."

 

[LightSome]

@87Cake

I had already tagged him lmao

Please help us understand why @87Cake was banned.

 

[JustMe03]

Oh lmao

I had already tagged him lmao

 

[LightSome]

Oh lmao

Nub you've been misreading everything today

 

[Goddessics]

The sugar is the big deal smh. Just make him appeal. So easy. And like force admins to deal with it.

 

[LightSome]

The sugar is the big deal smh. Just make him appeal. So easy. And like force admins to deal with it.

The thing is to make it more public and try to get other opinions. Since a lot of people/ a fair amount of people are not happy with decision made.
The simple fact with a appeal is this isn't a actual formal appeal. It's neutral territory for all parties to lay out opinions and discuss the matter. Also I am sure the person in question will appeal.

 

[Goddessics]

The thing is to make it more public and try to get other opinions. Since a lot of people/ a fair amount of people are not happy with decision made.
The simple fact with a appeal is this isn't a actual formal appeal. It's neutral territory for all parties to lay out opinions and discuss the matter. Also I am sure the person in question will appeal.

Ok? But it’s annoying seeing all around. It’s one person

 

[JustMe03]

It’s one person

Why does that matter?